Because Bloodless Coup is based in a poor state, we're used to hearing bad news about the economic picture, or at least to the idea that there are a significant number of people who are not doing OK economically. But because West Virginia is fairly cheap in some respects (barring the boomtowns of the Eastern Panhandle) a dollar, especially a housing dollar, tends to go far enough.
Then I followed a link to this this AP story.
Average incomes after adjusting for inflation actually fell from 2001 to 2004, and the growth in net worth was the weakest in a decade, the Federal Reserve reported Thursday.
Many families were struggling in the aftermath of the 2001 recession and the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000, the Fed's latest "Survey of Consumer Finances" showed. The comprehensive look at household balance sheets comes every three years.
Average family incomes, after adjusting for inflation, fell to $70,700 in 2004, a drop of 2.3 percent when compared with 2001. That was the weakest showing since a decline of 11.3 percent from 1989 to 1992, a period that also covered a recession.
"Also covered a recession." Does that mean that the period covered the decline and also covered a recession, or that this period covers a recession and that period also covered a recession? Ah writing.
The average incomes had soared by 17.3 percent in the 1998-2001 period and 12.3 percent from 1995 to 1998 as the country enjoyed the longest economic expansion in history.
The median family income, the point where half the families made more and half made less, rose a tiny 1.6 percent to $43,200 in 2004 compared with 2001.
Thank dog that the only mouths I have to feed are furry, because a youngish college professor in the social sciences in West Virginia makes below the median family income. But please, don't say anything in front of the p-e-t-s because they think they are p-e-o-p-l-e, maybe even b-a-b-i-e-s. Capisce?
The gap between the very wealthy and other income groups widened during the period.
The top 10 percent of households saw their net worth rise by 6.1 percent to an average of $3.11 million while the bottom 10 percent suffered a decline from a net worth in which their assets equaled their liabilities in 2001 to owing $1,400 more than their total assets in 2004.
"This is the continuing story of the rich getting richer," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "Clearly, the gains in wealth are going to the top end."
Well, at least we are a growing ownership society.
The Fed survey found that the percentage of Americans who owned stocks, either directly or through a mutual fund, fell by 3.3 percentage points to 48.6 percent in 2004, down from 51.9 percent in 2001. Analysts said this was an indication that investors burned by plunging stock prices in the decade's early years have been leery about getting back into the market.
The share of Americans' financial assets invested in stocks dipped to 17.6 percent in 2004, down from 21.7 percent in 2001. But reflecting the housing boom, the share of assets made up by home ownership rose to 50.3 percent in 2004, compared with 46.9 percent in 2001.
The Fed survey found that debts as a percent of total assets rose to 15 percent in 2004, up from 12.1 percent in 2001. Mortgages to finance home purchases were by far the biggest share of total debt at 75.2 percent in 2004, unchanged from the 2001 level.
So much for the payback on that patriotic spending.
And if you were wondering, yes, I screwed up the time stamp on the big female sterilization and abortion rights post. Oops!
Posted by binky at February 23, 2006 06:18 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Economics